Organization of Evaluation of Scientific Activity in China: Methodology and Experience

Building an effective system of organization of scientific activity, which is harmonized with the needs of society, is becoming an urgent task for Ukraine. A decisive role in this process is played by the procedure for evaluating the efficiency of activities of scientific institutions. The aim of the publication is generalizing the practical experience gained in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and searching for opportunities to implement the organizational principles of the methodology for evaluating the results of scientific activity into the practice of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. In recent decades, the PRC has made significant progress in the development of scientific and innovative activities. Scientific research in China is carried out by research institutes and research universities. The system of financing scientific activities in this country is built on the basis of the results of evaluation, obtained by creating a unique methodology in which scientometric instrumentarium is combined with expert evaluation. The peculiarity of the organization of scientific activity in the PRC is that that if there are more than 2.5 thousand higher education institutions in the country, most scientific research is carried out by a small number of scientific organizations, that include only about 100 universities. The reform of the organizational mechanism of the State management of scientific activities in China took place in several stages, each of which deserves to be studied on the subject of positive experience and possibilities of avoiding the undesirable mistakes. The practical experience of continuous reform of the organizational system of management of scientific activities in China deserves a detailed study and search for ways of possible implementation of the instrumentarium for evaluating the results of scientific activity in the practice of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, taking into account the similarity of the structure of the scientific sphere. Both countries have similar research management structures, including relevant ministries and a network of national academies of sciences. This fact speaks in favor of using the existing practical experience of reforming the field of scientific research and preventing mistakes made by government officials during the implementation of a number of reforms in China (for example, the proven inexpediency of evaluating the results of the activities of scientific institutions, relying solely on quantitative indicators of scientific activity). Also noteworthy is the experience of mixed funding of scientific research, which combines the public sources with the competitive ones.